DOCSLIB.ORG

90 Effect of Milking Procedures on Milk Somatic

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
90 Effect of Milking Procedures on Milk Somatic 90 EFFECT OF MILKING PROCEDURES ON MILK SOMATIC CELL COUNT H. Kiiman1, E. Pärna1, A. Leola1, T. Kaart1 1 Estonian University of Life Sciences ABSTRACT. Data were collected from five dairy farms, where cows were milked with pipeline milking system. These agricultural enterprises were interested in monitoring and analysis of milkers' working time consumption, to make sure they follow all the machine milking regulations. On three farms the cows were milked using De Laval and on two farms with Rezekne pipeline milking equipment. The De Laval milking system was supplied with automatic cluster remover (ACR). This type of milking equipment enables the milkers to more properly milk the cows. On all dairy farms the cows were milked twice daily. Monitoring of the work activities of 24 machine milking operators, who milked the cows selected for our trials, was carried out immediately after control-milking. The duration of each element of the working process was recorded. Data on milk, fat and protein yields, and somatic cell count were collected. The mean duration of pre-milking udder preparation was 30 sec/cow, which did not meet physiological demands of cows during machine milking. Some cows were prepared only for 11 seconds, whereas the udder preparation comprised merely inadequate cleaning of teats, and foremilk was not stripped out. The maximum duration of over-milking was 103 seconds. A significant positive correlation (r=0.356***) was observed between the unit attachment to the cow and machine stripping. The milking operators, who were late in unit attachment, spent considerably more time on machine stripping. All the basic milking procedures had an impact on milk somatic cell count. A significant correlation was observed between over-milking time and somatic cell count as well as between pre- milking udder preparation and milk SCC (P<0.001). Keywords: somatic cell count (SCC), procedures in machine milking. Introduction The success of the modern dairy farm depends on the profitable production of high quality milk. Important factors for the prevention of high milk somatic cell count (SCC) are: post-milking teat disinfection, dry cow therapy, good milking management, treatment of clinical mastitis with antibiotics, and culling of problem cows (Barkema et al., 1998). Researchers (Merril et al., 1987) have determined that a twelve-hour interval between milkings is optimal in the case of twice daily milking. A correct milking routine includes different working operations: teat and udder cleaning, manual pre-stimulation, fore-milking, milking unit attachment to the cow, removal of milking unit, and effective post-milking teat disinfection (teat dipping). The investigations (Calhoun, 1995) have indicated that more than 50% of the working time is spent on milking. Nowadays the milking process is largely mechanised. Improper and careless milking may result in decreased milk let-down, increased incidence of udder diseases and low milk quality, which are ultimately causing considerable economic loss for dairy producers. Somatic cell count, or a parameter derived from this count, is often used to distinguish between infected and uninfected quarters. It has been found that 200,000 cells/ml is the most practical threshold to determine the profitability of dairy farms (Harmon, 1994; Heald et al., 2000; Haile-Mariam et al., 2003; Rogers, 1995). Somatic cells are also present in milk of healthy cows, and the increase in SCC is a normal cellular defence against udder infections (Koivula, 2005). Most countries do not widely record clinical mastitis incidences (Emanuelson et al., 1988; Lund et al., 1999). SCC is objectively recorded on a continuous scale, and it has a higher heritability than mastitis incidence (Kennedy et al., 1982; Pösö, Mäntysaari, 1996; Schepers, 1997; Koivula et al., 2004). The year 1979 was the beginning of somatic cell count registering in Estonia and from 1987 these data are measured and registered monthly in Estonian milk recording scheme (Pentjärv, Uba, 2004). Herds with high somatic cell count must adopt a short-term goal of reducing SCC as quickly as possible so that milk can be legally marketable and dairy cattle breeding sustainable. More and more attention is paid to milk quality. After the accession of Estonia to the European Union, the demands on milk quality were in compliance with the proposed EU legal limit of 400,000 cells/ml. Similar levels are required in New Zealand and Australia, whereas Canada established the requirement of a SCC < 500,000 cells/ml (Sargeant et al., 1998; Norman et al., 2000). Estonia faces several problems with somatic cell count affecting milk quality and udder health. In 2004, 26% of cows were culled due to udder diseases, and mean milk somatic cell count was 361,000–435,000 cells/ml on dairy farms in Estonia (Jõudluskontrolli…, 2005). These circumstances give reasons to investigate the influence of milking procedures on somatic cell count in milk. Effect of milking procedures on milk somatic cell count 91 Material and Methods Data were collected from five dairy farms, where cows were milked with pipeline milking system. These agricultural enterprises were interested in monitoring and analysis of milkers' working time consumption, to make sure they follow all the machine milking regulations. On three farms the cows were milked using De Laval and on two farms with Rezekne pipeline milking equipment. The De Laval milking system was supplied with automatic cluster remover (ACR). This type of milking equipment enables the milkers to more properly milk the cows. On all dairy farms the cows were milked twice daily. Monitoring of the work activities of 24 machine milking operators, who milked the cows selected for our trials, was carried out immediately after control-milking. The duration of each element of the working process was recorded. Data on milk, fat and protein yields, and somatic cell count were collected. The milking routine included the following: 1. Pre-milking udder and teat preparation (cleaning, washing, drying, massaging and stripping for early detection of clinical mastitis). 2. Cluster attachment. 3. Control of the milking unit and the cow's udder during milking. 4. Over-milking. 5. Machine stripping. 6. Shutting off the vacuum and cluster removal from the cow. 7. Washing of the milking unit. 8. Washing hands and cloth towel. 9. Teat dipping in the sanitising solution immediately after milking. Additionally were registered the 'transition', i.e. the time a milking operator proceeded from one work operation to another, and the moments when the operator was involved in other activities. Stoppages and undone work operations were also fixed. MS Excel and SAS program were used for data processing. Results and Discussion Present-day milking machines enable the operators to milk cows fast and so that all four udder quarters are milked out. At the same time the regulations of machine milking procedures must be followed. To ensure complete udder evacuation, it is essential to perform careful pre-milking udder preparation, which will induce the release of oxytocin (Bruckmaier, 2000). Adkinson et al. (1988) investigated milk somatic cell count in 30 Virgina dairy cattle herds and registered the udder preparation for milking. The analysis of the results revealed, that using of disposable paper towels reduces milk somatic cell count, eliminating the possibility of bacteria transmission from infected cows to healthy ones. The similar result was reported by Randy et al. (1990). All studies are consistent in showing that during pre-milking procedures it is necessary to use individual paper towels, especially in these dairy cattle herds where are frequent problems with high somatic cell count in milk. It is essential to attach milking unit to a cow promptly. The longer is the delay in cluster attachment, the shorter will be the milking time with milk ejection (Merrill et al., 1987; Barkema et al., 1998). After the unit attachment delay the milk ejection is slow, the udder is not emptied and the machine stripping is abnormally long-lasting (Etgen et al., 1987). If the cow is milked at the beginning and in the middle of lactation, it is suggested that the milking unit be attached within 50 seconds after beginning udder preparation. At the end of lactation, it is recommendable to attach the milking unit to a cow a little later (Bruckmaier, 2000). Table 1. Duration of the basic milking procedures (sec) Items Mean Standard deviation Minimum Maximum Udder preparation 24.0 6.8 11.0 49.0 Delay in milking unit attachment 5.9 8.9 0 43.0 Machine stripping 22.1 9.7 0 54.0 Over-milking 26.3 24.3 0 103.0 As soon as the milk flow has finished, the milking unit must be removed to prevent over-milking, which is one of the most considerable factors causing mastitis infection. Correct time for machine stripping is when the milk flow is changed incomplete and will start to decrease (Etgen et al., 1987; Randy et al., 1990; Timmermans, 1996). Over-milking may occur immediately after the unit attachment, when the cow's milk let-down reflex is not sufficiently initiated (Calhoun, 1995). The influence of over-milking on milk somatic cell count is also confirmed by Wesen and Schultz (1970). Numerous studies have been carried out to investigate the optimum duration of machine stripping. With regard to this problem, Reneau (1986) recommends that the machine stripping should last no more than 30 92 H. Kiiman, E. Pärna, A. Leola, T. Kaart seconds, whereas Etgen et al. (1987), Barkema et al., (1998) and Calhoun (1995) suggest spending no more than 20 seconds. When the udder is prior adequately prepared for milking, 10–15 seconds of machine stripping per cow is sufficient. Milking operator massages the udder only to control if the milking process has ended properly. If the udder preparation is insufficient, the machine stripping lengthens significantly (Adkinson et al., 1988; Etgen et al., 1987).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Factors Affecting the Patterns of Total Amount and Proportions Of
    animals Article Factors Affecting the Patterns of Total Amount and Proportions of Leukocytes in Bovine Milk Alfonso Zecconi 1,* , Lucio Zanini 2, Micaela Cipolla 2 and Bruno Stefanon 3 1 Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences-One Health Unit, University of Milan, Via Pascal 36, 20133 Milano, Italy 2 Associazione Regionale Allevatori Lombardia, Via Kennedy 30, 26013 Crema, Italy; [email protected] (L.Z.); [email protected] (M.C.) 3 Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Udine, Via delle Scienze 206, I-33100 Udine, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 10 May 2020; Accepted: 4 June 2020; Published: 6 June 2020 Simple Summary: Differential leukocyte count (DSCC) in milk is considered important to improve our knowledge on udder immune response since it describes the proportions of leukocytes in milk. However, we hypothesized that the total amount of each cell population in daily milk production would be even more useful. Therefore, we analyzed the pattern of both DSCC and the total amount of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN) + lymphocytes (LYM) (P + LT), calculated as SCC milk × yield DSCC (as proportion). Cows with 200,000 cells/mL have a P + LT average between 5.0 108 × ≤ × and 3.0 109 cells. In cows with SCC >200,000 cells/mL, the values were 1.6 1010 and 2.5 1010 × × × cells. Therefore, the presence of a well-defined inflammatory process increased the overall amount of PMN and lymphocytes LYM of 1 log, from 1 109 to 1 1010. The assessment of the total amount × × of PMN and LYM, to our knowledge, has never been reported in scientific literature and the value reported may be proposed as benchmarks for studies on udder immune response.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Staphylococcus Species Isolated from Bovine Quarter Milk Samples
    animals Article Characterization of Staphylococcus Species Isolated from Bovine Quarter Milk Samples Regina Wald 1,* , Claudia Hess 2, Verena Urbantke 1, Thomas Wittek 1 and Martina Baumgartner 1 1 Department of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, University Clinic for Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Wien, Austria; [email protected] (V.U.); [email protected] (T.W.); [email protected] (M.B.) 2 Department of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, University Clinic for Poultry and Fish Medicine, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Wien, Austria; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +43-1-25077-5203 Received: 28 March 2019; Accepted: 24 April 2019; Published: 27 April 2019 Simple Summary: Staphylococci are the most prevalent bacteria isolated from bovine mammary secretions. They not only originate from cases of intramammary infections, but also from teat canal, skin and other environmental sources. They are usually divided into coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) and Staphylococcus (S.) aureus. In contrast to the contagious nature of most S. aureus infections, the epidemiology of CNS is less clear. Results of our observational study suggest that both, CNS and S. aureus, can be associated with clinical and subclinical mastitis but may also appear as colonizers and remain undetected in cows without inflammatory signs. As a result, the consequences differ, especially with the increased emphasis on reducing antibiotic use as a means of limiting antimicrobial resistance (AMR). A positive S. aureus test result requires antibiotic treatment of infected cows after evaluation of the probability of bacteriological cure, and, where necessary, implementation of management strategies to limit new infections.
    [Show full text]
  • Staphylococcus Aureus Mastitis-Cow Factors That Influence the Chance of Cure
    Staphylococcus aureus Mastitis-Cow Factors that Influence the Chance of Cure By: Michelle Arnold, DVM Staphylococcus aureus is an important bacterial cause of contagious mastitis on dairy farms worldwide. More importantly, it is often at the root of chronic high somatic cell counts, recurrent clinical mastitis, and damaged mammary gland tissue. Because it is contagious from cow-to- cow and very difficult to cure, control is heavily dependent on prevention of new infections. To control contagious spread of Staph. aureus, the use of proper milking procedures especially the correct use of teat dips is essential. It is also of great importance to identify Staph. infected cows by milk culture then segregate and milk these cows last if possible. Decisions must then be made whether to treat the individual case, cull the cow or stop saving milk from the infected quarter. Unfortunately, research indicates the cure rate after treatment ranges from 4-92% with overall success averaging a dismal 20-30%. In an attempt to explain this wide variation in cure rates, a review was conducted by Barkema et al. (2006) of multiple studies from approximately a 20 year span (1985-2005) and it was found that certain factors present in the cow, in the bacteria and in the choice of treatment regimen have a strong impact on the probability of cure but are rarely considered when making treatment decisions. Awareness of these factors gives the producer more tools to use in his decision making process in order to treat only those with the greatest chance of successful cure and return to normal milk production.
    [Show full text]
  • The Value and Use of Dairy Herd Improvement Somatic Cell Count
    National Mastitis Council Fact Sheet: The Value and Use of Dairy Herd Improvement Somatic Cell Count Mastitis is the most costly dairy cattle disease. In herds without an effective mastitis control program, approximately 40 percent of cows are infected in an average of two quarters. It has been estimated that mastitis costs about $200 per cow per year. This figure may increase unless dairy producers can achieve a reduction in prevalence of the disease. How Much Does Mastitis Cost You? The only way this question can be answered is to know how much mastitis is in your herd. Mastitis robs you in many ways: reduced milk production; treatment cost; discarded milk; death and premature culling; decreased genetic advancement; and reduced milk quality. Reduced milk production accounts for approximately 70% of the total loss associated with mastitis. Unfortunately, this loss is often not fully appreciated by producers. First, it occurs at the subclinical level (the quarter is infected but the milk appears normal) and second, the loss is from less milk produced, which can be difficult to recognize. How Effective is Your Mastitis Control Program? Despite the losses associated with subclinical mastitis, most producers continue to evaluate the effectiveness of their control programs based on the number of cows with clinical signs. Since the number of subclinical cases that eventually show up as clinical is quite variable, a producer cannot rely solely on a record of the number of clinical cases to evaluate his/her control program. Further, this record may actually be deceiving if producers expect the adoption of a proven management procedure to result in a rapid reduction in the number of clinical cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Milk Quality Mastitis and SCC by Bernadette O’Brien
    chapter Section 5 31 Milk Quality Mastitis and SCC by Bernadette O’Brien Introduction Mastitis and SCC (somatic cell count) reduce the yield and quality of milk from dairy cows. High levels of SCC can adversely affect the processability of milk. 1 How do I calculate the true cost of mastitis and SCC? 2 How can I manage an SCC/mastitis problem? 3 What maintainance should I carry out on the milking machine? 4 What is a good milking routine? 5 How should I manage drying off? 6 How should I manage freshly calved cows? 7 How do I identify and treat problem cows? 8 What is a good action plan when SCC is high or there is an increase in clinical mastitis? 183 chapter 31 Mastitis & SCC 1 How do I calculate the true cost of mastitis • 200,000 to 300,000 cells/ml indicates that approximately and SCC? 30% of the herd are infected. Milk SCC levels above 100,000 mean you are losing money. • 300,000 to 400,000 cells/ml indicates that approximately On average mastitis costs farmers ?60/cow/year. 40% of the herd are infected. “ “ Key terms How to “ Clinical mastitis infection - changes in the udder and/or Calculate the cost of mastitis and high SCC the milk are detected easily by the milker, i.e. clotting and Costs associated with mastitis discolouration of the milk, reddening, heat, pain, swelling and hardening of the udder. Subclinical costs = milk quality penalties + loss in milk produced by cow Subclinical mastitis infection - the udder and milk appear Clinical costs = antibiotics normal and there are no visible signs of infection but the + discarded milk + labour + veterinary attention somatic cell level in the milk is raised.
    [Show full text]
  • Milk Quality Assessment by Means of Somatic Cells Identified in the PMC Test and Porta SCC
    Journal of Dairy & Veterinary Sciences ISSN: 2573-2196 Research Article Dairy and Vet Sci J Volume 13 Issue 5 - October 2019 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Aguirre EGG DOI: 10.19080/JDVS.2019.13.555880 Milk Quality Assessment by Means of Somatic Cells Identified in the PMC Test and Porta SCC Aguirre EGG*1, Larios GMC2, Ortíz GS3, Vázquez FF4, Galicia DJA5, Utrera QF6, Rodriguez BBI° 1,2,3,4,5,6 Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnia, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, México. °Student from Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnia Submission: September 30, 2019; Published: October 14, 2019 *Corresponding author: Aguirre EGG, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnia, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, 7.5 Carretera Cañada Morelos – El Salado Tecamachalco, Pue, México Abstract The cells of the body (somatic) that are found in milk are called milk cells. Somatic cells are made up of leukocytes and epithelial cells. Leukocytes udder tissue. The content of somatic cells in milk allows us to know key data on the function and health status of the lactating mammary gland and dueare introducedto its close intorelationship the milk with in response the composition to inflammation of milk, thatthey mayare aappear very important due to illness criterion or injury of its and quality. epithelial Of all thecells milk detach cells from in an the infected lining room,of the approximately 99% will be leukocytes, while the rest will be secretory cells that originate from the tissues of the mammary gland. The somatic cell count of milk is commonly expressed as the total somatic cells per milliliter of milk.
    [Show full text]
  • Bulk Tank Milk Somatic Cell Count and Sources of Raw Milk Contamination with Mastitis Pathogens
    Veterinarni Medicina, 52, 2007 (6): 223–230 Original Paper Bulk tank milk somatic cell count and sources of raw milk contamination with mastitis pathogens D. Rysanek, V. Babak, M. Zouharova Veterinary Research Institute, Brno, Czech Republic ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to probe the relationship between prevalence of selected principal mastitis pathogens and somatic cell counts in bulk tank milk samples. The sources of milk contamination were evaluated. The samples were collected from 298 dairy herds (with approximately 32 000 dairy cows). Only 48.3% of the bulk tank milk samples were free of contamination of pathogens of interest. Approximately 38.9% of the milk samples were contaminated with only one, 12.4% with two and 0.3% with three pathogens. The arithmetic mean of logarithmically transformed data of bulk tank milk somatic cell count rise in order: pathogen free, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus uberis, Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus (5.381; 5.413; 5.495; 5.518; 5.563, respectively). The arithmetic mean differences between bulk tank milk somatic cell counts in pathogen-free and single-pathogen contaminated samples have revealed a significance for the Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus groups (P < 0.01). Using binary logistic regression, a statistically highly significant relationship (P < 0.001) has been found between the number of contaminations of bulk tank milk samples with mastitis pathogens and bulk tank milk somatic cell counts. The relationship allows the determination of the probability of finding relevant mastitis pathogens in bulk tank milk samples with different levels of bulk tank milk SCC. A 63% probability can be defined at a cell count level of 400 000/ml and 20% at a cell count level of 100 000/ml.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Somatic Cell Count in Dairy Cattle
    DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE RESEARCH & EXTENSION Agriculture and Natural Resources University of Arkansas System FSA4002 Reducing Somatic Cell Count in Dairy Cattle Michael Looper Somatic cell count (SCC) is the Methods to Monitor SCC Professor and total number of cells per milliliter in The most common methods of Department Head ­ milk. Primarily, SCC is composed of monitoring SCC in bulk tank milk are Animal Science leukocytes, or white blood cells, that are produced by the cow’s immune actual SCC from the health depart­ system to fight an inflammation in ment or milk plant and the Wisconsin the mammary gland, or mastitis. Mastitis Test (WMT). In an individual Since leukocytes in the udder increase cow, the actual SCC or linear SCC as the inflammation worsens, SCC score from Dairy Herd Improvement provides an indication of the degree of (DHI) records and cow-side tests such mastitis in an individual cow or in the as the California Mastitis Test (CMT) herd if bulk tank milk is monitored. indicate SCC. Also, some milk process­ ing plants will measure SCC on An inflammation of the mammary samples of milk from individual cows. gland may result in clinical mastitis Table 1 shows that all methods can with varying degrees of visible signs indicate SCC. However, the CMT is a of the disease or subclinical mastitis subjective measure and may vary where no visible symptoms occur. from dairy producer to dairy producer. Pathogenic bacteria entering the udder via the teat orifice move into the teat canal and cause an infectious Importance of response. Contagious bacteria Decreasing SCC ( Streptococcus agalactiae and Staphylococcus aureus) are more Federal law allows milk to be sold difficult to control than environmental only if the bulk tank has a SCC of less pathogens such as coliform.
    [Show full text]
  • Somatic Cell Count in Goat Milk: an Indirect Quality Indicator
    foods Article Somatic Cell Count in Goat Milk: An Indirect Quality Indicator Klára Podhorecká 1,* , Markéta Borková 2, Miloslav Šulc 3, R ˚uženaSeydlová 2, Hedvika Dragounová 2, Martina Švejcarová 2, Jitka Peroutková 2 and OndˇrejElich 2 1 Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic 2 Dairy Research Institute, Ke Dvoru 12a, 16000 Prague, Czech Republic; [email protected] (M.B.); [email protected] (R.S.); [email protected] (H.D.); [email protected] (M.Š.); [email protected] (J.P.); [email protected] (O.E.) 3 Food Research Institute Prague, Radiova 1285, 10200 Prague, Czech Republic; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: A high somatic cell count (SCC) impacts dairy quality to a large extent. The goal of this work was to investigate differences in goat milk composition and technological parameters according to SCC cut-off (600, 700, 800, and 1000.103/mL). Thirty-four individual milk samples of White Shorthair goats in a similar stage of lactation were investigated. The first differences in milk quality appeared already at SCC cut-off of 600.103/mL (5.58 LSCS-linear somatic cell score), yet the most striking differences were found for SCC over 1000.103/mL (6.32 LSCS), which was expressed by lowering heat stability (126 vs. 217 s, p = 0.034), increasing protein (3.41 vs. 3.04%, p = 0.009), casein (2.80 vs. 2.44%, p = 0.034) and chloride (164 vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationship of Somatic Cell Count and Mastitis: an Overview
    429 Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 24, No. 3 : 429 - 438 March 2011 www.ajas.info Relationship of Somatic Cell Count and Mastitis: An Overview N. Sharma, N. K. Singh* and M. S. Bhadwal1 Division of Veterinary Clinical Medicine and Jurisprudence, SKUAST-J, India ABSTRACT : Mastitis is characterized by physical, chemical and bacteriological changes in the milk and pathological changes in the glandular tissue of the udder and affects the quality and quantity of milk. The bacterial contamination of milk from the affected cows render it unfit for human consumption and provides a mechanism of spread of diseases like tuberculosis, sore-throat, Q-fever, brucellosis, leptospirosis etc. and has zoonotic importance. Somatic cell count (SCC) is a useful predictor of intramammary infection (IMI) that includes leucocytes (75%) i.e. neutrophils, macrophages, lymphocytes, erythrocytes and epithelial cells (25%). Leucocytes increase in response to bacterial infection, tissue injury and stress. Somatic cells are protective for the animal body and fight infectious organisms. An elevated SCC in milk has a negative influence on the quality of raw milk. Subclinical mastitis is always related to low milk production, changes to milk consistency (density), reduced possibility of adequate milk processing, low protein and high risk for milk hygiene since it may even contain pathogenic organisms. This review collects and collates relevant publications on the subject. (Key Words : Mastitis, SCC, Factors, Management) INTRODUCTION (WST) are available for the diagnosis of mastitis under field conditions (as cow side test). Mastitis, although an animal welfare problem, is a food Somatic cells are indicators of both resistance and safety problem and is the biggest economic problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule Discovery in Milk Content Towards Mastitis Diagnosis: Dealing with Farm Heterogeneity Over Multiple Years Through Classification Based on Associations
    animals Article Rule Discovery in Milk Content towards Mastitis Diagnosis: Dealing with Farm Heterogeneity over Multiple Years through Classification Based on Associations Esmaeil Ebrahimie 1,2,3,* , Manijeh Mohammadi-Dehcheshmeh 2, Richard Laven 4 and Kiro Risto Petrovski 2,5,* 1 Genomics Research Platform, School of Life Sciences, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086, Australia 2 Australian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5371, Australia; [email protected] 3 School of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia 4 School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Auckland 0745, New Zealand; [email protected] 5 Davies Research Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5371, Australia * Correspondence: [email protected] (E.E.); [email protected] (K.R.P.); Tel.: +61-44912-1357 (E.E.); +61-8831-37989 (K.R.P.) Simple Summary: Invisible (subclinical) mastitis decreases milk quality and production. Invisible Citation: Ebrahimie, E.; mastitis is linked to an increased use of antimicrobials. The risk of the emergence of antimicrobial- Mohammadi-Dehcheshmeh, M.; resistant bacteria is a major public health concern worldwide. Therefore, early detection of infected Laven, R.; Petrovski, K.R. Rule cows is of great importance. Machine learning has opened a new avenue for early mastitis prediction Discovery in Milk Content towards based on simple and accessible milking parameters, such as milk volume, fat, protein, lactose, Mastitis Diagnosis: Dealing with electrical conductivity (EC), milking time, and milking peak flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Dairy 2014 Animal and Milk Quality, Milking Procedures, and Mastitis Plant Health Inspection on U.S
    United States Department of Agriculture Dairy 2014 Animal and Milk Quality, Milking Procedures, and Mastitis Plant Health Inspection on U.S. Dairies, 2014 Service Veterinary Services National Animal Health Monitoring System September 2016 Report 2 Table of Contents The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits dis- Mention of companies or commercial products does not crimination in all its programs and activities on the basis imply recommendation or endorsement by the USDA of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental warrants the standard of any product mentioned. Product status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, names are mentioned solely to report factually on avail- political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an able data and to provide specific information. individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) USDA–APHIS–VS–CEAH–NAHMS Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7 communication of program information (Braille, large print, 2150 Centre Avenue audiotape, etc.) Should contact USDA’s TARGET Center Fort Collins, CO 80526–8117 at (202) 720–2600 970.494.7000 (voice and TDD). http://www.aphis.usda.gov/nahms To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Direc- #704.0916 tor, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, Cover photograph courtesy of Dr. Jason Lombard. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250–9410, or call (800) 795– 3272 (voice) or (202) 720–6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
    [Show full text]